College Media Network - Search the largest news resource for college students by college students Jobs and internships for students -

Obama should talk to public directly

By Hany Rashwan / Lantern columnist

rashwan.1@osu.edu

|

Published: Sunday, February 7, 2010

Updated: Monday, February 8, 2010

It’s been more than a year since Barack Obama stepped into the White House as the 44th president of these United States. His election was a historic one, not just introducing the nation’s first African-American president but also in changing the way campaigns would run from here on out.


The true genius of Obama really emerged during his campaign; no one expected their team to so artfully transform campaigning, taking it online and in turn thoroughly engaging millions of youths who would have otherwise not paid any attention to the presidential race.


Such a transformation can’t be understated. In fact, the last time someone shook up politics this much, it was 1954 and John Kennedy was introducing America to our first televised presidential debate.


In many respects, the ailing 1954 Richard Nixon is eerily reminiscent of the sickly 2008 John McCain. In both elections, it was the transformer who strongly won. How someone who was in such an envious position can now be experiencing a 51 percent approval rating might come off as a surprise to many, but in reality, is surprisingly obvious. Obama is suffering from the worst nightmare a politician can experience — he’s lost touch with the American people, his constituency. Don’t panic yet though because I still think that, no pun intended, there’s still hope that Obama can soon change.


Thomas Friedman, Pulitzer-winning author and New York Times columnist, recently compared the current state of the U.S. to a patient who just started feeling better after an intense bout in the intensive care unit. Just as he starts to slowly sit up, all the doctors around him (representing dear Washington) suddenly start fighting and throwing equipment around. The patient asks what any sane human being would: “Are you people crazy? Aren’t there any adults here?” The problem is that the patient is right; there are no adults around.


In Washington, the general absence of adults is normal and the lack of maturity is more-or-less expected. As a people, we expect our politicians to be self-serving, selfish and at times even border-line corrupt. Our everyday speech shows it and this anger and frustration is translated into numbers when we poll, as it is right now with the 111th Congress’ dismal 18 percent approval rating.


So, what really changed?


Well, we supposedly elected an outsider as our president last November. Obama, perhaps in light of his congressional inexperience, constantly campaigned by labeling himself as an outsider. He’s not a part of Washington and we just happily gobbled all that up, truly believing that our constant political disappointments might finally stop. He wooed and won the hearts, minds, and votes of millions based on his extremely social campaigning, showcasing his honest and direct messages. That’s what we need again.


If Obama should focus on just one misstep of his administration, it’s this: The president’s strengths are in taking complicated issues and boiling them down for us, or as Friedman calls it, talking to us like adults, “making us smarter rather than angrier.”


Instead of paying heed to the politically unstable Washington, forget those middlemen and deal directly with us, Mr. president. We are the true power-holders in the United States, even if it doesn’t seem so 99.9 percent of the time. The prowess you so elaborately demonstrated during the campaign should only be repeated now in your administration.

We then will be responsible for keeping those corrupt, selfish, self-serving politicians in line. After all that, if they still demand to be divisive, ignorant and useless, we can simply use said powers to end their legislative careers during their re-election. And at that time, we would be more than happy to do so.

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

6 comments

JS
Tue Feb 9 2010 13:19
Interesting topic.
JB
Tue Feb 9 2010 10:40
You've totally missed the point..

People aren't pissed that Obama doesn't speak to them directly. He has held lots of press conferences, televised debates and even went on the Tonight Show!

They're pissed that Obama promised that if we would only let him spend a boatload of money on his stimulus bill and the bank bailouts that everything would be okay and unemployment wouldn't top 8%. We now see that was a boldfaced lie. People are also mad about his monstrous and corrupt healthcare bill, his tremendous expansion of the deficit, his decision to close Guantanamo and try terrorists in civilian courts (instead of military tribunals).

This president has done very little positive work for the American people.

Anonymous
Tue Feb 9 2010 00:50
"The president’s strengths are in taking complicated issues and boiling them down for us." One single solitary example might be nice. I think O's strengths might rather be in simply convincing columnists he's "super cool."
Anonymous
Mon Feb 8 2010 14:05
I think I'm more concerned that the editor didn't catch the 1954 mistake than the fact that it was made in the first place.
Anonymous
Mon Feb 8 2010 10:44
I hope the author isn't majoring in history... Kennedy won election in 1960, not 1954.
Anonymous
Mon Feb 8 2010 06:14
BLA... People seem to live in the moment, it only takes a month to get on the good side of badside... The important part just seems to be in being sure to use your propaganda right.

If he is out there talking to the people all the time, I sure as heck won't be thinking he is doing his job... That is what a press secretary is for... Wish more people saw it the same and didn't ride the press winds...

It is all propaganda...







log out